That ankle injury was nasty, and given his previous ankle injuries you have to wonder if this latest one has broken him completely, and he will just break down every time now.
The deals we hand out to some players should be enough to call for a royal commission
2 Likes
The new contract we gave him is looking ever worse as each week goes by
Did we give him 2 years before or after the ankle. Regardless it was generous. If it was after the injury we really do deserve to be liquidated
1 Like
He did his ankle on May 1st against the Kangaroos. And the 2 year contract was announced on May 16th.
The funniest thing is, according to our wonderful medical team at the time I think they had him listed as being only 1-2 weeks away from a return 
12 Likes
Yeah, you have to be careful with your ultimatums around Essendon⌠what you think is incredibly stupid, is actually highly likely to have occurred.
3 Likes
1 Like
The whole club is soft. Not ruthless enough
2 Likes
Hang on, I thought SWAGGER meant ruthless.
Must have been lost in translation somewhere
4 Likes
Big call.
2 Likes
Disagree. It looked a terrible decision when made,and still looks a terrible decision.
1 Like
Oh holy jesus what a farce.
Someone defending the club might argue that the contract might have been signed before the injury. I would refute at that point Scott was playing him on a wing and he looked useless. Either way, a 2yr extension was ridiculous.
2 Likes
1 year wouldâve been a pretty ordinary decision but arguable/justifiable
2 years was always a bad call.
1 Like